So Senator Durbin was forced to go to the well of the Senate to offer up a blubbering ‘apolocorrection’ after being cut off at the knees by Mayor Daley of Chicago. This was his second attempt to apologize for telling the truth while employing a poor rhetorical strategy, and not surprisingly, while the apology is good enough for the always principled Lt. Smash, it still ain’t good enough for our friends at Powerline:
Senator Dick Durbin characterizes his incessant imputation of heinous misconduct to the American military as “a very poor choice of words”: “Sen. Durbin apologizes for Gitmo remarks.” Does he retract his comparison of our soldiers to mass murdering Nazis and Communists? The answer, the Minneapolis Star Tribune will be happy to know, is “no.”
Hugh Hewitt, of course, is not accepting this apology, either:
Dick Durbin’s appearance on the floor of the Senate for yet another attempt at clarification included the word “apologize,” but it was not an apology.
Hugh is, however, thrilled with Mayor Daley’s performance in this whole affair, and took the opportunity once again to impugn the character of most Democrats:
Daley’s an old-school Democrat: He supports the military, and according to the AP, Daley “says its a disgrace to accuse military men and women of such conduct.”
Because, of course, ‘new-school’ Democrats don’t support the military. No doubt Mayor Daley and Hugh are leading the charge to force the judges and the prosecution in the Abu Ghraib cases to apologize for their allegations.
And, in case you thought this was about an apology, and not, as it is plain to see, an opportunistic attempt to extract political advantage from the Democratic party, Michelle Malkin is ready to set the record straight:
I’m certainly not going to be intimidated by the right-wing message machine,” he said. “If I’m going to back off every time they decide their unhappy with my statements, then I really won’t be doing my job. — Dick Durbin, 6/17/05
Yeay, Right-Wing Message Machine! Go, team! Now that Durbin has been smeared as an objectively pro-terrorist, anti-military, Amerikka hating Democrat, it is time to expand the meme:
The contrast between forthright young men like Pete and gasbags like Dick Durbin and Howard Dean is, I think, striking.
Meanwhile as, to the facts of the case, the NABA defense (Not as Bad As) defense has been skillfully refined so as to now be boiled down to “I love Gitmo” bumperstickers, discussions of lemon chicken, and the following thematic maxim:
“Fewer People Die than in American Civilian Prisons!”
Let’s put aside the fact that this civilian v. military metric is a silly comparison, because no one disputes that fewer people die in military prisons than in civilian prisons. Likewise, many of the acts of murder in civilian prisons are inmate on inmate violence, not guard on inmate violence. Finally, and most importantly, Durbin wasn’t talking sabout the 26 allegations of murder that are currently under investigation. He was reading accounts of abuse as observed by an FBI agent:
On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold….On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.
The account described by Durbin leads to several questions. First, is it believable and credible? Second, is it widespread? And third, is it abuse and/or torture?
As to whether or not what isalleged in the FBI email is believable, of course it is. Let’s look at a table of approved interrogation techniques and compare it to the allegations the despicable military-hating Durbin and his counterpart in the FBI have brought up:
Allegation:
On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water.
Interrogation Techniques:
Use of stress positions (e.g. prolonged standing)- check
Allegation:
Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more.
Interrogation Technique:
Prolonged interrogations (e.g. 20 hours)- check
Isolating prisoner for up to 30 days- check
Allegation:
On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold….On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him.
Approved Technique:
Environmental manipulation (exposing detainee to temperature adjustment or unpleasant smell)- check
Allegation:
On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.
Approved Technique:
Environmental manipulation (exposing detainee to temperature adjustment or unpleasant smell)- check
Prolonged interrogations (e.g. 20 hours)- check
Use of stress positions (e.g. prolonged standing)- check
Add all the approved techniques together, and I think we can agree that this is a believable allegation, and it is credible, unless you think the FBI hates America. Credible is not the same as verified, but credible does imply that there is a good enough reason to believe that this did probably happen. I don’t know whether or not these qualify as torture, I don’t know if this qualifies as abuse. It sure sounds abusive to me despite being ‘approved’ techniques, and I know for a fact that the rest of the world is not to keen on these measures. Likewise, my reaction if I heard this was happening to our guys would be akin to the reaction I would have if you shoved a red hot poker up my ass. And, despite what the jackasses at Powerline assert, this is not all about “worrying that a terrorist’s air conditioning might not be properly adjusted.”
How widespread is it? I have no idea. But it does appear that descriptions above all are ‘approved’ techniques, and I can offer some additional anecdotal evidence:
A U.S. military policeman who was beaten by fellow MPs during a botched training drill at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, prison for detainees has sued the Pentagon for $15 million, alleging that the incident violated his constitutional rights.
Spc. Sean D. Baker, 38, was assaulted in January 2003 after he volunteered to wear an orange jumpsuit and portray an uncooperative detainee. Baker said the MPs, who were told that he was an unruly detainee who had assaulted an American sergeant, inflicted a beating that resulted in a traumatic brain injury.
Baker, a Gulf War veteran who reenlisted after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was medically retired in April 2004. He said the assault left him with seizures, blackouts, headaches, insomnia and psychological problems…
The drill took place in a prison isolation wing reserved for suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban detainees who were disruptive or had attacked MPs.
Baker said he put on the jumpsuit and squeezed under a prison bunk after being told by a lieutenant that he would be portraying an unruly detainee. He said he was assured that MPs conducting the “extraction drill” knew it was a training exercise and that Baker was an American soldier.
As he was being choked and beaten, Baker said, he screamed a code word, “red,” and shouted: “I’m a U.S. soldier! I’m a U.S. soldier!” He said the beating continued until the jumpsuit was yanked down during the struggle, revealing his military uniform.
Plus, there are worried lawyers:
Notes from a series of meetings at the Pentagon in early 2003
tomaig
“Finally- is this torture/abuse? It sure sounds like abuse to me. It sure does sound like something you would hear going on in some third-world country or at the hands of a despotic tyranny (as Durbin stated).”
Or you COULD say it sounds like what the FBI did to the Branch Davidians for weeks on end – Remember? The bright lights at night, the constant loud music, the shutting off of power (no AC!) and finally the tank assault. Yet that happened to American citizens on American soil and I’ll bet (Then-) Congressman Dickey Durbin didn’t compare Jant Reno to Pol Pot, even after what was it? 80? 100? Americans were incinerated.
And perhaps you could provide some evidence of any despotic tyranny – anytime, anywhere, who used such horrendous torture methods as “Oooh! That AC sure is cold!” or “My, it’s sure stuffy in here!” or “OH MY GOD! IT’S A WOMAN!” on its victims.
SomeCallMeTim
We’re screwed. Just accept it, John. It will take us, the US population, a number of years to walk ourselves back from the moral framework in which torture is “not torture.” Some of us never will. If Torture Memo becomes a Justice on the S. Ct., we never will as a nation.
It’s best just to get the Cable Extended Package, and settle in for a long ride. Life in the US still remains fantastic. It’s just not as fantastic as it used to be.
Mithrandir
I have a bit of trouble following your reasoning here, John. You compare the allegations against HRW’s table (very thorough as usual), and find that all are within the “acceptable” limits by one check or another. Yet your only conclusion is that this makes the allegations “believable??” Quite frankly, this makes the allegations not abusive at all: it makes them approved techniques. We shouldn’t (& neither should Durbin) be having this conversation. Gitmo is staying within the limits of what they’ve been given.
The only plausible conversation could be one arguing our techniques. And frankly, that has nothing (directly) to do with Gitmo, and needn’t be out in public. It’s a conversation for Durbin (if he is really so fired up about it) directly with Rumsfeld.
That implies the only logical conclusion for Durbin to make this public announcement about an unsubtantiated FBI memo was to incite emotion and for his own – or his party’s – political gain. Period.
And to even infer a comparison to Nazi’s, etc. is a HUGE insult, you know that. After all, we live in a country now where we can’t even bear to look at a flag that officially flew over some states over 100 years ago, and to do so brings the label “racist.”
Besides, tomaig is right. This stuff isn’t torturous in any way/shape/form. And how do you expect us to extract information from an “enemy?” By serving dry chicken instead of lemon chicken?
scs
It all depends. For instance, this guy who was in a hot and cold room who defecated on himself. Who was he and what information did the military want out of him? If the military had definite knowledge that he had info that would prevent a huge suicide bomb from being imminently set off, then maybe I don’t mind what happened to him. If he is just being treated that way because guards like Charles Grainer get their jollies out of it, then of course I object.
Treatment like that should be used, if at all, in the most extreme, dangerous circumstances. Permission to use that treatment, if at all, should be given by high up officers whose name can be made available to the congress if need be so that someone can be held responsible. Yes, the ‘torture’ or coercion methods are spelled out by the military, but to whom and why they are applied are not spelled out. That is something that needs to be discussed. Durbin had a point that we have to be very careful about this or we will not look like America anymore.
John Cole
Quite frankly, this makes the allegations not abusive at all: it makes them approved techniques.
Something can be abusive and an approved technique. Which is why we have a discussion of the policy.
It all depends. For instance, this guy who was in a hot and cold room who defecated on himself. Who was he and what information did the military want out of him?
Which is why I said I don;t know all the facts. getting all the facts out there and explaining why this is going on would bea bad thing, why?
James Emerson
Good post John…You’ve left me snarkless.
I wish Durbin hadn’t offered an apology.
Even though his original word choice was inflammatory, most of the flames arose because the words contained such awful and undeniable truths. We have abandoned our long standing respect for international and domestic laws in the pursuit of some illusory short term gain. Actions that could be described as torture have taken place in our name. To some still undefined degree…we are all nazis now…at least in the eyes of the world.
But apologizing only lends credibility to the administration’s apologists, so his words were formualted with an eye fixated on some illusory short term gain at the expense of long termed American interests. He must have felt that the heat was getting too close to home. One thing is for certain, his original speech that started this brouhaha put a much needed conversation in motion. I can only hope that it will continue, because the fact remains that our Consitution has suffered from the tortured justifications of this war, and the Bill of Rights seems destined to a permanent state of extraordinary rendition…
p.lukasiak
I don’t think that there is any question that this goes beyond mere “abuse” into torture. Prolonged exposure to the cold isn’t just stressful, its painful…..and one can only imagine what prolonged exposure to 100 degree heat (especially if we assume that the prisoners are not provided with an unlimited supply of water) is like — but I would suggest that it goes well beyond merely “stressful”.
scs
I don’t think it would be a bad thing. Never said that. Of course it would be, as Martha says, a good thing. The more transparency the better.
Jon H
scs writes: “If the military had definite knowledge that he had info that would prevent a huge suicide bomb from being imminently set off, then maybe I don’t mind what happened to him.”
If the person “knows” something like that, what the heck is he doing in Gitmo? The bombing would probably have already happened while he was on the plane to Cuba.
Anyone in Gitmo doesn’t have that kind of timely information.
cfw
Excellent marshalling of the evidence. The facts speak for themselves.
What we need is some folks at the flag rank (generals), with Rumsfeld backing, saying that we have and will enforce, from here forward, the policy of humane treatment we see in places like the LA County Jail (for pretrial detainees) and San Quentin’s death row (for convicted murderers).
We will treat detainees like we would want and expect US detainees to be treated.
We can do it and survive as a nation with our principles intact.
Taking this approach gives opponents “on the fence” one more reason to give up rather than terrorize.
Where does one find precedent for how to abuse with cold, standing, etc. Look in Solzenitzen, The G—- Archipelego.
Are these things we need/want to do to “win”? If done in a US prison, plantiffs’ lawyers would have a field day suing for violations of section 1983. Why have a different standard at Gitmo?
Bush/Gitmo policy looks like the sort of misguided approach nicely discussed in the play “A Judgment at Nurenberg.”
Jon H
mithrandir writes: “Quite frankly, this makes the allegations not abusive at all: it makes them approved techniques.”
I’m sure Doc Mengele had lots of approved techniques in his laboratory of horrors.
physics geek
Blackfive’s response:
In my opinion, once Al Jazeera picked it up and ran with it, the damage was done. Oh sure, there will be quite a few who will claim that the FBI report was true and, therefore, Durbin’s words were true. Time will tell about that.
But in the information age, you would think that a Senator would not have his head up his ass about what his words will mean halfway around the world. I believe he knew what he was doing. And it’s all politics over winning this war.
That is unless Dick Durbin is stupid and a poor student of history and has no understanding of what the Nazi’s did. If that’s the case and since he’s in DC, then he should walk his ass over to the Holocaust Museum and see the @#$%ing difference…
Does this qualify as a principled response, or is it too much like a rightwing attack?
John Cole
Physics Geek-
A.) Have you heard me argue that he should have made the Nazi reference?
B.) Al Jazeera gets to dictate what Senators now say? these guys believe jews make bread from the blood of muslims. Who cares fuck-all what the propagandsists think?
B.) Blackfive is in the military, and can say whatever he wants. The people I listed above are nothing more than political hacks.
TM Lutas
Was the FBI agent’s report handed over to independent investigators? Were the allegations investigated? What was the final result of the investigation? Do we know any of this? Taking stands on a report, even by an FBI agent, without knowing the context, makes for poor analysis.
First, we assume the report is right. It could be, or not be. That it was an FBI agent lends it credibility but that’s not enough to change policy and we don’t know enough context other than to ask further questions.
We know the report was given to a Senator but we don’t know whether it was given to any independent investigators, nor do we know whether the allegations were investigated. We have zero access to any legal opinions on whether the allegations, even if true, constitute unacceptable treatment of illegal combatants.
We’re supposed to treat illegal combatants worse than geneva convention protected prisoners in order to preserve the value of following the rules of war. So all of you who agree with Durbin have an obligation to work out how we’re supposed to do that.
John Cole
The FBI email was retrieved from the FBI by the ACLU ounder the Freedom of INformation act. It is real, it is credible, and it remains to be seen if it is verified.
We’re supposed to treat illegal combatants worse than geneva convention protected prisoners in order to preserve the value of following the rules of war. So all of you who agree with Durbin have an obligation to work out how we’re supposed to do that.
Hunh?
Jon H
TM Lutas writes: “We’re supposed to treat illegal combatants worse than geneva convention protected prisoners in order to preserve the value of following the rules of war.”
The whole “illegal combatants” thing lost whatever relevance it ever had when we switched from “major combat operations” to “occupation”.
When you’re arresting people in their homes, detaining people brought in by bounty-seeking surrogates, and otherwise grabbing people in non-combat situations, the whole distinction of legal vs. illegal combatants becomes meaningless. Many of the prisoners are not and never were combatants.
Stormy70
Severe torture, not a good technique for interrogation, so why do it? Point is, they are not torturing detainees down at Gitmo. They are terrorists, and info needs to be extracted from them, and if approved techniques like you describe are being used, then what is the problem? European countries would be much more harsh in their techniques, under the same circumstances. History proves that out. Hell, the Russians executed a Beslin terrorist fleeing in his underwear. I have no sympathy, nor really care if the Gitmo terrorists are chained to the floor, or forced to look at naked women. I would rather be feared by terrorists, than manipulated by false allegations of torture, as their terrorist handbook tells them to make. Durbin is still an asshat for doing what he did, and Blackfive is right, the damage is done. But like you, John, I could give a shit what backward Islamic Fascists think.
Jon H
Stormy writes: “They are terrorists,”
Only true of about 10% of them. Good to know you support the torture of innocent people.
Granted, some of the innocent Gitmo inmates might take up arms against us after they’re released, but that’s kinda what you get for doing unto others like that.
Mike S
I think these are an aberration, not the norm. I don’t think all of our soldiers are evil torturers. I don’t know what is true and what is not, an I don’t know what is considered acceptable under international norms. I, in fact, love the military and think it is the best way that we as a society spend our money.
I totally agree. Every military person I know, ex and current, falls into the catagory of best people I know. The people that do the things described and those that defend it hurt the vast majority that are damn fine people. Those that condone and even praise it hurt them even more.
The Talk Radio blowhards and others that attacked the messenger hurt this country and it’s military far more than Durbin’s ill advised comments. They showed the world that this countrie’s rhetoric doesn’t match it’s actions. That will have far more lasting consequences than his comments. A full and honest discussion of the charges would have proven that our rhetoric is not just rhetoric.
Hopefully it’s not too late.
RSA
John,
How long do you expect it to be before the Republican party is in the hands of rational and responsible people like yourself?
(I would have said “grownups”, but that may be a touchy subject for you today :-)
Geek, Esq.
Would comparing Lt. Calley to the Nazis or Pol Pot be viewed as unpatriotic according to the Rightwing Noise Machine?
Maybe, just maybe, the Rightwing Noise Machine should spend more time trying to discuss the war and Iraq, what’s at stake there, and when people can expect the troops to come home.
Instead of using the Iraq war as a club with which to attack their political opponents.
Because 59% of the population now opposes the Iraq war and wants the troops home soon.
It’s probably a better idea to convince those folks than the expected tactic of calling such people ‘defeatists’ and helping to undermine our troops (yeah I’m looking at you Instapundit).
Because such charges of anti-Americanism are logically absurd when directed to a majority of Americans.
Mithrandir
John Cole:
Quite frankly, this makes the allegations not abusive at all: it makes them approved techniques.
Something can be abusive and an approved technique. Which is why we have a discussion of the policy.
True. I said that. (“Plausible conversation…”) Durbin’s remarks do not amount to a “discussion on policy” though. They are angry shouts aimed to agitate the uninformed.
Jon H: Mengele…
yeah … that’s just great. Do you work for Durbin? Way to take it out of context. Read & try again.
J. Michael Neal
yeah … that’s just great. Do you work for Durbin? Way to take it out of context. Read & try again.
I read it, and I think that you are misinterpreting the table. These aren’t techniques that HRW is listing because they don’t think that they constitute abuse. They are listing techniques that were specifically approved by the US government, at least some of which HRW thinks do constitute abuse. The presence of anything on this table does not mean that it is vindicated as not being abuse unless you have already assumed that they aren’t engaging in abuse.
Rick Moran
So…okay. You’re 100% correct. Now what?
John your passion and honesty about this subject are admirable. But you’re driving me nuts by not offering anything better.
Are you saying we need an independent investigation? DO YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT SUCH A PANEL WOULD BE DEVOID OF PARTISAN POLITICS? Do you believe that the anti-war Dems wouldn’t take the opportunity to use whatever information is found there to make our position so untenable that we’d be forced to withdraw?
Are you saying we should move all prisoners to American prisons and let our underpaid, undertrained prison guards have at these guys?
Maybe we should turn the thugs over to the UN? I can’t think of two entities that deserve each other more.
What could any independent board do that the Pentagon isn’t doing already? Excuse me, but if you believe that the Pentagon is covering up then by all means, let’s arrest the lot of them and throw them in jail.
I’m asking these questions not because I support torture or abuse. I’m asking because whatever actions we take will not help our standing in the world, won’t make our guys safer, and won’t contribute to the war effort.
Ergo…what’s the point?
Rick Moran
Sorry for the doubla posta.
p.lukasiak
B.) Al Jazeera gets to dictate what Senators now say? these guys believe jews make bread from the blood of muslims. Who cares fuck-all what the propagandsists think?
with all due respect, regardless of whether or not you consider al Jazeera a credible source of information, there are hundreds of millions of people in the Arab and Islamic world who do — so you’d better care “what the propagandsists think?”.
(Personally, I think al Jaseera is about as much a propaganda organ as FoxNews with much the same intent and methodology. Just as Fox skews its coverage to make “America” look good to itself, al Jazeera skews its coverage to present a positive image of Arabs/Muslims to themselves. )
Katinula
John, as always, a very good and thoughtful post. Being a liberal, sometimes I don’t agree with you, but I always welcome your insight and hope that I too can look at facts with a clear moral compass instead of a fuzzy partisan one.
I just don’t understand why more Americans aren’t at least INTERESTED in the issue. It seems the knee-jerk reaction in the blogosphere and on this comment board is either agreement, or defiant disagreement. If you don’t like what Durbin said, or anyone else for that matter, aren’t you at least interested in finding out what really happened?
And by ‘interested in finding out what really happened” I don’t mean that if the evil MSM said it, you believe the opposite. There should be a transparent search for abuses, punishment of those who perpetrated them AND/OR their superiors (whoever that may be..not Lyndie England types who were following orders) and a new policy on the treatment of prisoners captured in the War on Terror.
Matt
I would take the complaints about using Nazi rhetoric a lot more seriously had I heard them from the same sources when Santorum tossed the term around in regard to Democrats a few months ago.
Eric Kephas
When Durbin made his comment, he got flamed by the right.
Now that Durbin apologizes for his comment, he’s getting flamed by the left.
Dick Durbin, the Democrat’s Trent Lott.
ppgaz
Re: Durbin, if anyone finds himself wondering why these seemingly intelligent politicians turn into mealy mouthed prevaricators once they get to DC, look no further than this story.
Durbin made a well crafted and thoughtful speech, accurate in fact and appropriate in rhetoric … and the embedded power structure in the Donkey party put him on his knees.
The Elephant party, of course, does the same thing. The entrenched have to keep their soldiers in line.
A disgusting and depressing spectacle.
American Skeptic
Hey, look on the bright side.
We’re winning the war on terror by defeating American scum like Durbin.
Uhh, yeah… uhh right, I guess.
Randolph Fritz
Any Senator who even slightly offends their colleagues will have much trouble getting any legislation passed. I expect the Republicans threatened to strip Durbin of all his committee memberships, and censure him as well; the collegiality of the Senate reflects the fact that even small conflicts can render a Senator weak and the majority party can rendery any Senator powerless.
KC
Well, it doesn’t matter what we say or think about any abuse that is/has happened, right? I mean, if most Americans don’t care and don’t demand anything of Congress, well . . .
Phoenix Woman
Olorin, the Valar are going to be mighty upset with you for advocating the methods of Melkor.
If torture never happened, please explain this guy’s death. (Oh, and not only was he innocent, but his American guards knew it — and killed him anyway.)
KC
Oh, this is why nobody in Congress is interested in torture:
http://www.bullmooseblog.com
Ed Marshall
They are terrorists, and info needs to be extracted from them, and if approved techniques like you describe are being used, then what is the problem?
First, you have no idea who those people are.
Second, if you really believe that shit is acceptable then quit using euphamism’s like “stress positions”. What you are saying is that the administration has the right to crucify (presumably not until death but it seems there have been a few accidents) a bunch of unknown people who have never seen a trial.
tikkun
John Cole’s post reminds me that soldiers and former soldiers are some of the most honest and thoughtful people I’ve ever met. I’m reminded that one of the most serious and effective peace makers in Israel was a hardened military leader.
John, thank you, also, for reminding me that there are Republicans out there who may imagine different solutions to human problems than I do but who want the same things for the world’s peoples as well as our countrymen as I do.
I’m tired, very tired of the “Me first and for me the best” on both sides of the political divide.
Whether Durbin is an apt practictioner of rhetoric or not doesn’t change the issue; will we Americans will demand justice in all situations, not just those that effect the bottom line of some company, tribe, or elite group.
I try to take seriously Jesus’s answer to the question, “When did we feed you and clothe you, Lord?” His answer still resonates like a liberty bell. It is comforting to know that there are those among my political opponants who do as well. Practicing justice in a prison is no easy thing but it is necessary if we are to call ourselves a just people.
shep
But you’re driving me nuts by not offering anything better.
Here’s a thought: supposedly, most of these poor schmucks were picked up in Afghanistan fighting the Northern Alliance in a civil war. How
Cyrus
Rick,
Are you saying we need an independent investigation? DO YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT SUCH A PANEL WOULD BE DEVOID OF PARTISAN POLITICS?
The same risk exists with every independent investigation undertaken in the history of this country. And yet for some inexplicable reason, independent investigations have been undertaken. Why should this be different?
Do you believe that the anti-war Dems wouldn’t take the opportunity to use whatever information is found there to make our position so untenable that we’d be forced to withdraw?
You know, considering that the Democrats are a minority in the House, the Senate, the Governorships and have held the White House for only eight of the past 25 years, you seem to think they have an awful lot of influence. If that hypothetical and unlikely investigation you suggested had equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats, how could it possibly become a tool of the anti-war partisan Democrats? Are they really that cunning and manipulative? The evidence seems to be against you on that one.
But more importantly, why do you feel that torture is inextricably linked to Operation Infinite Justice? Do you really believe that hunting down terrorists requires us to imprison people without trial and electrocute carjackers? It’s possible to oppose one but not the other, you know.
I’m asking these questions not because I support torture or abuse. I’m asking because whatever actions we take will not help our standing in the world,
Welll sure, nothing we can do would single-handedly reverse the damage that has already been done. But taking some action might make our standing less bad, you know. Or it might stop our standing from getting worse.
won’t make our guys safer, and won’t contribute to the war effort.
You think so? Maybe it’s just me, but it seems that pictures of torture victims (or their testimonies, if you don’t think the pictures should be printed) make some very good recruitment ads for terrorist groups. So maybe, just maybe, we should avoid torturing people then?
Ergo…what’s the point?
I suppose “doing the right thing” doesn’t enter into this at all.
You seem to be saying “Sure, torture is bad, but doing anything about it could potentially somehow make the war harder to fight, so we should ignore it completely.” Am I missing something?
Demosthenes Jr.
In response to those persons who said such treatment as the FBI (and numerous others) reported is ok, let me remind you who was the most effective interrogator the Germans had:
Luftwaffe Sergeant Hans Scharff, who rarely even raised his voice. He treated POW’s like people in a bad situation who needed help, and was said to have been able to “get a confession of infidelity from a nun”.
We don’t need these harsh tactics to learn what we need. And whether Durbin mentions concentration camps or gulags or not, Gitmo was already on that list in the minds of most of the world. It was not a propaganda coup for the other side. It was old news for everyone but us it appears.
John
On the subject of military people, don’t give a blank check just cause they’re in the service. Of the people I know in the military, nearly a third of them are rotten to the core.
1) the ex-army chick who now passes of stolen checks and sells drugs like methadone, oxy-contin, etc… Real upstanding huh?
2) the ex-army guy who steals, uses stolen ATM/Debit/Visa cards and stolen checks, and also has sex with other men who pay him for it.
The US Military is made up of US Citizens who run the gamut, Charles Graner and Lyndie England are two of those people. Bad apples exist, and when the leadership is lacking, bad apples will step further over the line than normal. Stop being an apologist for people in the military just because they are in the military. That doesn’t mean sh*t, and is just empty rhetorical bullsh*t.
RW
Yes, he did do something wrong. He analogized against the worst murderers in history. That was wrong.
I have no qualms with his “message” if it’s making sure that we are humane when we capture someone on the battlefield. The thing is: it would be wise to make that the message instead of analogizing against Pol Pot & Nazis.
This “he did nothing wrong” stuff while then saying “well, he said the wrong thing” out of the other side is mind boggling. He screwed up, he apologized. Move on and stop either kicking someone who is already down or trying to defend someone who ****has admitted to the error****.
Cripes.
Mr X
You have to wonder what the U.S. will ultimately do with most of the detainees. There is no evidence that all of them were terrorists when they were picked-up, but I can’t imaging that any of them will be very friendly if they are released. And just picture the PR nightmare when they start telling their stories.
Maybe that’s why they are being held indefinately.
Gay Veteran
Don’t trust a bipartisan independent investigation? How about a totally REPUBLICAN investigation but where the republicans are like former Sen. Danforth? What’s the matter? Don’t trust the people in your own party?
Was it torture? Gee, would you allow the SAME “techniques” to be used on American POWs?
tikkun
John, I’m not an apologist for the military but when they are good, they are very very good. The Marines seem to turn out a percentage of men and women who, because of their experiences with the threat of the death of their troops, are profoundly humane people. Believe me, I didn’t expect to find that among soldiers. But they keep popping up among my aquaintances.
John Cole
Tikkun- Yes, of course they are for the most part good people.
Rick- An independent board would be fine. Hell, an all Republican panel would be fine. But, if you really want me to shut up, we could just simply say:
“Yes- it is prefectly possible that the allegations in the FBI memo are true because they do fall under what we consider are necessary and accepted interrogation techniques.'”
-or-
“No, what happened does not fall under what we consider acceptable interrogation techniques, and we are looking into the allegations and intend to have an open and publick hearing on this issue.”
In the former, they would have to make their case why this is necessary, and while I wuold suggest those practices are unneccessary and vile, at least the public would have some sort of ability to mhold those individuals accountable.
In the second case, we would get to the bottom of the issue, find out if it did happen and not let allegations of this sort of behavior hang around like an albatross, and we could issue clearer and more exact requirements.
John Cole
All of which, I might add, would be preferrable to playing political games with what was a bad rehtorical comparison while ignoring the allegations from an FBI agent of some pretty bad behavior.
Hesiod
Welcome to the Dark Side, John.
BTW, great post. I link to it here. I think you should read what I wrote about this.
Jett-Parmer
Durbin used the wrong tool for his point. He made a big mistake and is working to correct it. The issue at GTMO is that there is no understanding of the scope and scale of the “problem”.
As a member of the military, I think coercive interrogations (as they have been detailed) are fine. However, there must be checks and balances against abuse. Some of this post indicates that these checks exist. A detailed review by the Navy JAG is a pretty significant check. A written paper trail of procedures would also indicate that a lot of people have given serious consideration to this. Our operations are wildly off the map in regards to our present foe. Many of our forces are functioning in uncharted territory. I have heard one three star describe it as fourth-generational warfare.
If there were abuses in GTMO, then there is a mechanism to START the investigation. It seems like it is underway. Should it be 100% transparent? Maybe, maybe not. I don’t necessarily want our enemies to know that we have a “limit” in our interrogation procedures. This is counter to our OPSEC and REVEALS a significant weakness! Or doesn’t anyone think that’s important?
Compuglobalhypermeganet
I guarantee that no women in the military are accepting Durbin’s “apology.” It is my experience that women tend not to accept the old “I’m sorry if you were offended,” unless it is immediately followed by “I was wrong, and I acted like an idiot, and I’ll never let it happen again.”
Just my experience.
Hesiod
The 800 lb gorilla here (or elephant in this case) is that whether these abuses were “approved” or not, they are still (by international law standards) torture.
And, as widespread as it APPEARS they are, it also looks like the White House and Pentagon were doing a lot of legal ass covering to seperate the decision-makers from possible posecution under US torture statutes, or (dare I say) impeachment.
Any administration that looks for LOOPHOLES in the US anti-torture statute is not only immoral it’s criminal.
Hence the use of “private contrators” to committ some of the most serious abuses. [i.e savagely beating detainees TO DEATH.]
This forces anyone who cares to prosecute these crimes to PROVE that the higher ups knew about and condoned the activity.
Unlike when regular military does this stuff. At whcih point, the knowledge of the commanding officer is presumed. Unless the behavior is punished AT THE TIME IT IS DISCOVERED.
John’s not quite willing to make these obvious points. But, there we are.
Whatever Clinton did to deserve impeachment, Bush has done 100 fold.
Hesiod
” guarantee that no women in the military are accepting Durbin’s “apology.” It is my experience that women tend not to accept the old “I’m sorry if you were offended,” unless it is immediately followed by “I was wrong, and I acted like an idiot, and I’ll never let it happen again.”
Why would they be offended in the first place. Durbin wasn’t referring to them, and there’s no evidnece that US military personnel were even responsible for the abuses he described.
This connection was simply dishonestly grafted on by the Bush-apologist/liars.
So, ironically, it was the GOP liars who smeared our troops without any evidence. Not Durbin.
Hesiod
“coercive interrogation techniques” are NOT fine.
They are not even necessary. When you start drawing lines, they will eventually be crossed.
John
This reminds me of the confirmation hearing of Condi when Chris Dodd made a statement about the end of WWII when we, meaning the US, demanded that the offenders get trials and be found guilty in a court of law, when others in Europe thought that they should be summarily executed. Somehow many in this country who would defend Gitmo wholeheartedly, and would say that being in a very hot or very cold room is nothing…
They forget or have lost the connection to the ideals of this country, and how when even one of us agrees that what happened, according to the FBI at Gitmo and other accounts, is okay that we are no better than the likes of Osama.
For us to say that certain people deserve to be treated badly because of who they are or what they believe or where they are from, that’s the rhetoric of Osama regarding the US. That’s the rhetoric of the Islamo-fascists who summarily disregard the humanity of any they don’t agree with. When people justify mistreatment of prisoners, regardless of whether they’re covered by Geneva III or Geneva IV, or labeled as an enemy combatant, they take on the mindset and justifications of our enemies and bring themselves down from the level of Americans who believe in what we should stand for, to the level of said Islamo-fascists who seek to kill, murder and destroy based on ideology rather than facts and reality.
We don’t even know if the people in Gitmo are there because they should be, or because some warlord in Afghanistan sold them to the US and said they were terrorists. For us to go to a place where we say that someone is a terrorist just because they were picked up in Afghanistan is pure fantasy.
We must still hold onto to our ideal that the innocent are such until proven guilty and that they can challenge the evidence against them, because if we don’t then we agree that innocence isn’t a factor and we become like Osama, and sorry to say, like regimes such as the Nazi’s and the Soviet’s to whom innocence was not a factor, only the perceived *guilt* of the individual according to the state, factual or not.
Sulla
John,
Nice post and I wondered what you thought of people like me. I won
Compuglobalhypermeganet
Why would they be offended in the first place.
Yeah, how could they be so stupid as to feel they were being compared with Nazis just because Durbin compared actions of soldiers to the Nazis? Well, you could always ask them. The offended soldiers are all over the blogs these days.
So, ironically, it was the GOP liars who smeared our troops without any evidence.
Ironically? Is that a new word for “in Bizarro World?”
Hesiod
“I don’t necessarily want our enemies to know that we have a “limit” in our interrogation procedures. This is counter to our OPSEC and REVEALS a significant weakness! Or doesn’t anyone think that’s important?”
Funny how you describe acting humanely, and respecting human rights as a “weakness.”
I consider it a strength.
The fact of the matter is, even the NAZIS figured out that humane treatment and building a rapport was an effective interrogation technique.
How is it that Bush apologists haven’t?
Hesiod
Hey, Compuglobalhypermeganet, did you even read the link I provided? Durbin said NOTHING about our troops. NOTHING. The people who comitted the abuse described in the FBI e-mail he quoted from WERE UNIDENTIFIED.
And as I show in this post, it is very possible they were private contractors. Not US military.
Thus, the GOP smeared our troops. Not Durbin.
And theye did it without any evidence of their guilt in ths matter. Unless they know something the rest of us don’t know.
Rachel
The whole point is that we should be better then them…all of them. The Nazis the terrorists…all of them. We shouldn’t measure ourselves agains some notion of “we’re nowhere as bad as they were”. We should take our own stand as America and walk on the moral high ground of policies that do not condone torture or abuse–call them what you will with benign euphemisms like “interrogation technique” or “stress position” etc. We need to stand out as a beacon. Not try to get as close to the line of torture as we can without crossing.
brie
John:
Loved your reasoned, rational post. But I’d stay away from this kind of unsupportable generalization next time: “the overwhelming majority of the time these guys are treated with a decency and graciousness and provided a level of comfort that no other nation in the world has afforded to its enemies.”
Unless you’re checked all the prisons in Europe, Japan, Canada, Australia and other Western democracies, you can’t support this statement. And there’s a relationship between Americans throwing around statements like this (“best” country in the world, “freest” country in the world are others I hear) and Americans feeling entitled to invade a country that did not attack us and posed no threat to us.
arceyea
In another blog I read a reference to what “Rambo” would do, in fact what he was depicted doing in the movie when Americans were subjected to treatment such as has been described taking place under OUR authority in Gitmo.
That is only a simplistic reminder… WE purport to be the GOOD GUYS, to be BETTER. Others have said it here better than I can.
Recent apologies for lynching and the conviction of the Mississippi Burning guy yesterday remind us that, in fact, we aren’t always BETTER as individuals, but can’t we be BETTER as a society, as a nation?
Yeah, we were all frightened by terrorist acts on our own soil. But we have the perspective of time now. If we can’t bring forth charges and try the detainees (why?). If we can’t independently investigate the allegations of abuse (why?). Can we stop -NOW- sanctioning treatment of “enemies” that would evoke outrage (and has across history) were it applied to our captured troops?
And -please- can’t we expect our leaders/representatives to be honestly concerned?
jerry
Poor John Cole wakes up the next morning to wonder why he is now a single, pregnant mother. Too bad he didn’t consider who he was sleeping with night before he became their bottom.
jerry
Poor John Cole wakes up the next morning to wonder why he is now a single, pregnant mother. Too bad he didn’t consider who he was sleeping with before he became their bottom.
jerry
Sorry for the duplicate post. I only clicked submit once!
jerry
Your system seemed to detect a duplicate post or duplicate click, but instead of informing me I had already made a post, it suggested I wait a bit before hitting post. Oh well, http is an enabling, but minimal protocol.
John
Sulla,
If you aren’t concerned about it then that is perfectly okay for you personally, but in doing so you have to also extend the same to those who are enemies when they do harm to our people.
I think that with the war on terror that there are certain things that will happen which are not very nice, but we as a people need to draw the line when it comes to these things happening to innocent people. After all, on 9/11 it was our innocent citizens who were killed and their deaths motivated us to fight terrorism. If we don’t have the same value judgement for non-American innocents then we are morally bankrupt and have become moral relativists, because on it’s head, the whole issue is about protecting innocent people from those who would try to kill them.
In order to claim the higher moral ground you must extend that argument to all innocent people’s, or you make it look like you value innocent American life more than that of other people’s. Nationalistic leanings aside, that is not a defensible moral position. In having a commitment to all innocents, you must extend to those you detain the right to challenge their detention and give them a fair hearing, because as said in previous post, you do not know who should and shouldn’t be in Gitmo. They were just picked up somewhere and due to that the belief is that they are all terrorists, when many of them are most certainly not. KEEP THE BAD GUYS, but don’t keep the good guys because you will turn them into bad guys. BTW, when I say you, we, etc I’m not singling anyone out but referring to us as a society.
As far as the military, due to the fact that they have a civilian command, don’t trust that they’ll be able to clean their own house. The leadership in the military, I believe, wants to do the right thing, but they cannot do so if they are hamstrung by the civilian leadership. That’s where we come in by demanding the best from the civilian leaders in order for them not to put our military between a rock and a hard place.
urthshu
Gay Veteran asks:
Was it torture? Gee, would you allow the SAME “techniques” to be used on American POWs?
Well, sure, seeing as how I’ve already watched a number of beheadings. Absolutely I would. It means some fine young men would still be alive.
Jonny Quest
To use these coercive techniques is to pursue a dubious tactical advantage (possible useful information) at the expense of the strategic advantage (the US moral high ground in the WoT). It’s just not worth it, and for the U.S. to be seen as the defender of such techniques is very harmful to us in the long run. It’s time for the higher-ups to come out loud and clear against these practices before too much damage is done.
It may not be too late. Imagine Rumsfeld: “The United States does not condone the use of abusive/coercive techniques against those we have captured in the field. Any infractions against this policy will be investigated fully.”
John
Urthshu,
so it’s okay for us to do it because they did it? That attitude/analysis is the problem. If we are better than these people, our horror at the fact that they behead innocent people like Nick Berg IS ONLY UNDERCUT when we condone abusive interrogation and detention techniques.
It proves the world right in their opinion that Americans only care if other Americans are hurt. It proves that our analysis and reasoning is incorrect if we say that we’re better than the Islamo-fascists and believe in freedom, liberty, justice and equality but then go do something we’d expect of them. It’s like saying that it’s okay to beat your wife because other men beat their wives, without looking at the moral underpinnings, or lack thereof, of your argument.
Jules Siegel
For all those who think that this was not torture, I’d suggest that you do a little experiment.
Have one of your associates put handcuffs on you and keep you in a stress position for twenty-four hours in 100
urthshu
John:
I answered within the limits of the question I quoted. No more.
Sakitume!
tomaig is right. This stuff isn’t torturous in any way/shape/form
I find it ironic that this comment comes from someone calling himself Mithrandir — aka Gandalf, who urged Frodo not to slay Gollum, but to pity him.
There are terrorists ensconced at Gitmo, but there are also simple Taliban soldiers, too, who should be considered “standard” POWs. Yet they are not.
Either way, detainees have been subjected to ugly, dehumanizing abuse. German eugenicists of the 20s learned early on to dehumanize those they considered worthless. Subjecting the detainees to torture, even if not the boiling-them-alive or pulling-the-fingernails-out kind, is grotesque and beneath us, and practically speaking sets back the WOT one hell of a lot.
Depressed
@tomaig:
That’s a great point. It sounds like Janet Reno did the right thing. George Washington used some similarly harsh tactics to put down the Whiskey Rebellion, but no one is calling him a traitor.
bill
tomaig: It’s good to see that you’re defending the Branch Davidian. In a country that should be governed under Biblical law, isn’t it quite unfortunate that a blasphemer like David Koresh, who claimed to be the Messiah, was dealt justice by being incinerated to death? Even if it was at the hands of the evil Clinton administration, any man who claims to be God deserves to be burned alive. If we’re going to post the Ten Commandments in our courthouses, we shouldn’t be defending blasphemers as martyrs now, should we?
SebastianT
It seems to me that those who are advocating, or are abivalent about this kind of behavior don’t really seem to understand the effect it has on the current situation in Iraq and any future conflicts we might engage in. The purpose of war is not necessarily to destroy the enemy. It is to remove their capacity and willingness to fight, which doesn’t necessarily depend on killing anyone. Without clear objectives it is extremely difficult to measure success, and the military mind has no choice but to resort to measuring success by the number of the enemy removed from the fight, since one way to remove the enemies capacity and willingness to fight is to destroy large enough numbers of them that the survivors are too few or too unwilling to continue and they have difficulty enlisting replacements (due to the risk/benefit analysis the potential recruit engages in, which is related to our own recruiting problems). This is why we are seeing a return of body counts. But killing the enemy doesn’t NECESSARILY decrease the willingness of an enemy to fight, as we saw clearly in Vietnam, if the result of NOT fighting is reasoned to be worse than the potential benefit of engaging the enemy (and maybe surviving). You will never run out of potential recruits then. Try a thought experiment: Imagine you have a group of the enemy holed up in a house and for various reasons you either can’t simply bomb it to rubble (say there are innocent people inside, or to the ultra-cynical something of value that would be destroyed by a wholesale bombardment). Now, as a military commander you are going to have to go in there and get these guys. How much more difficult is your job going to be if you announce on a megaphone that you are going to come in there fighting, and anybody you take prisoner you are going to torture at great length (maybe to death) afterwards? They will do what anyone in that position will do, they will fight to the death. And you will probably take that house, but what about the next and the next as word spreads about your methods? Maybe you will take all the houses, but your casualty figures will be much higher than otherwise. Now imagine that you tell the enemy that anyone who doesn’t surrender will be killed and those who surrender will win fabulous prizes? As long as you are not lying the difference would be quite striking. And the thing is, all that really matters is the perception of torture in the mind of the enemy. Maybe you only tortured a few guys, but if everybody knows you did it and it is condoned and left unpunished or only lightly punished, the enemy commanders can use that knowledge to ensure their soldiers fight to the death almost every time. The enemy thinks “maybe I will be the unlucky one.” And before you blame the media for exposing torture (“If the bad guys didn’t know about it they couldn’t use it as propaganda!”) I must remind you that people simply disappearing with absolutely NO explanation of what is happening to them is an even greater incentive to continue fighting, since the enemy commanders can create any kind of horrifying story in that case (or they don’t even have to since that is troubling enough). And this doesn’t even take the moral reasons for not engaging in torture into account.
The fact is, that killing the enemy is not the best measure or method of ensuring victory, unless it is accompanied with other incentives to NOT fight. The questions we have to ask are: What is that incentive for these guys? What will happen if they lose? And, what is the incentive to join this insurgency? If nothing changes policy wise on the diplomatic and reconstruction front, we would have to commit genocide in Iraq in order to dry up the well of potential recruits, and if the U.S. did something like that, the damage to ourselves and world stability would be incalcuable. By treating our prisoners with respect and dignity, we create an incentive for the enemy to surrender, regardless of what we might want to do to them to satisfy a desire for revenge, not to even mention the fact that past evidence has shown that torture is not an effective interrogation method. We must create the perception that there will be life after this war and it will be a better life, even if it is on our terms. Until you do that, every struggle is a death struggle and the only way to win is to exterminate all potential enemies, and at that point, you have done enormous damage to your own military (morale wise), any indigenous population you hoped to have as potential partners for the future, and your reputation in regards to future conflicts.
Good luck with that.
crsrds
“We shouldn’t (& neither should Durbin) be having this conversation. Gitmo is staying within the limits of what they’ve been given.”
I think the point was that the standards need to change…
THis line of rationale condones the actions of torturous regimes, which we should avoid at all costs.
Hesiod
“Well, sure, seeing as how I’ve already watched a number of beheadings. Absolutely I would. It means some fine young men would still be alive.”
Well they certainly died quicker than the detainees we savagely beat to death.
Maybe the terra-ists will one up us again and star hacking off limbs one by one? Or flaying people alive?
Bob
As John said a while back, torture doesn’t work. If the guy is innocent, or even if the guy is just a low-level grunt, torturing will only get you bad information. When you are dealing with a culture of jihadism, where martyrdom is the key to heaven, you’re playing into your enemy’s hands.
Most of the stuff getting the bad rep is stuff that has worked its way into America’s interrogation repetoire over the last decade or so. Okay, in Vietnam they threw guys out of helicopters at a thousand feet. Still, the ass-clown stuff like peeing on the Koran doesn’t play well in the hearts and minds of those we are trying to win over.
Instead of trying to convince each other that torture is really good and effective, junk it and go back to less offensive behavior.
Maezeppa
Senator Durbin compared torturers to torturers. Is the real lesson supposed to be that it’s okay for Americans bind people and leaves them lying in their shit as the hours turn to days?
Are we now expected to NOT think “this kind torture only happens in places lik Nazi Germany or Russian gulags or Cambodian cages?”
Flint
I went to the ACLU site and downloaded the FBI reports.
The military interrogators knew that they were going over the line, because they started to identify themselves as FBI agents.
They were afraid that if it ever got out what they were doing that they could shift the blame to the Bureau.
12/04, 8/2/2004 12/15/2004 FBI [OGC]
Learned Limb
I can’t believe the traitorous blathering I’m seeing from men and womenfolk who are supposedly Republicans! This nonsense about ‘torture,’ brought up by namby-pamby liberals who don’t know what it takes to fight and win a war, should not be taken seriously amongst experienced andright-thinking people. The President and the military are doing what must be done to preserve our freedom and spread its blessings to others. It is counter-productive and downright ungrateful to go looking behind the curtain to see how the are achieving those noble goals. Our wonderful men and women in uniform are the product and the highest expression of our civilization. They can be trusted completely to do what is right, neccessary, and proper for the future of the country they serve. To suggest anything else is treason. Would that it were in the power of our leadership to shut down viper’s nests of sedition such as this one. You all (excepting those who criticised the authors’ disloyalty) should be ashamed of yourselves before being handed over to the government for correction.
Rick
Some real adept guest comments here. 80s flashback: NOT!
Cordially…
Sulla
John,
Thanks for the response and I just wanted to say a couple things so you further know where people like me are coming from-
1. On the question of innocence we have a tradition in this country of allowing 10 guilty people to go free so we don
Hesiod
Hey John, Karl Rove says you want to kill our troops.
No, I’m not kidding.
Hesiod
In other words, Sulla…you are a wussbag who has absolutely no faith in the principles upon whcih this country is based.
You are more concerned about protecting your own heinie than in protecting what this country supposedly stands for.
He’s my suggestion to you…if you care more about your personal safety than freedom, the rule of law, justice and human rights, then why don’t you personally surrender to Al Qaeda?
I’m sure they won’t hurt you if you submit without a fight.
That way, you can protect your on rear end, without your betrayal of American principles and values doing any more damage here at home.
Leave the fighting for freedom, democacy, the rule of law and human rights to us patriots.
btwg156
Here is an article worth reading. Its also funny.
Sen. McCain Brokers A Deal With Sen. Durbin and Sen. Frist”>
Or go to http://satire.myblogsite.com/blog
article dated June 20, 2005
Sulla
Hesiod,
That
Hesiod
“That
Jett-Parmer
Hesiod, your observation as to my labeling the revelation of our “limits” as a weakness was misinterpreted. I will restate, I do not advocate torture, I do not approve of it and I believe strongly that our forces act in accordance with our principals. By the way, what stood as torture twenty years ago and what will be regarded as torture twenty years from now is likely to change. Fact of life.
What should be understood is that if our enemy believes we may or may not do something, that is more potent than the necessity for action. Which is why every President always says that “all options are on the table”.
I still want a detailed understanding of what and when for GTMO. Some of this data is no doubt still classified. I suspect, but don’t know, that the actual events are far less pervasive than we are led to believe. The FBI report is too vague for my liking.
MadCity
Nice post. All of the red herring BS (“Branch Davidian this and Clinton that”) doesn’t change the fact that Durbin said was correct, if inelegant. If we can’t look ourselves in the mirror without whining and crying about “those other, uglier, people,” then we are in SERIOUS trouble. All of the relativistic sops (“at least it isn’t as bad as x, or if may have prevented a nuke from blowing up under an orphanage of young Republicans”) should belly up to the fact that they are defending despotic practices. It’s the kind of stuff we claim justifies the Iraq war (the torture rooms, remember?). America is better than this.
Captain Wrath
Once again, and for the last time. Durbin compared the treatment that some detainees recieved with the WORST kinds of genocide in world history. No matter how you feel about the torture issue, or about treatment of prisoners or George W. Bush, what Durbin did was a slander, a lie and a denigration of the memories of INNOCENT people who were butchered. Thus, he was not ‘right’.
Had he merely gone to the floor and stated the FACTS, without all the hyperbole, a useful dialogue might have occurred. Instead, we have a propaganda coup for the terrorists and the dictators in the middle east. Yeah, gee, I wonder how conservatives get the idea that Dems don’t support the troops.
When Lott made some off-hand remark about how he wished Thurmond should have been President, it was like the sky was falling. When Durbin states US troops are the equivalent of Nazis, he’s just trying to make a point badly.
Please…
Hesiod
“I still want a detailed understanding of what and when for GTMO. Some of this data is no doubt still classified. I suspect, but don’t know, that the actual events are far less pervasive than we are led to believe. The FBI report is too vague for my liking.”
It’s pervasive. How do I know this? Deductive reasoning.
The very fact that the Bush administration is preventing an inquiry about Gitmo from taking place, either domestically or internatinally, I think raises concerns. But that wouldn’t be enough to prove that something was up.
You have to couple it with their permitting investigations into Abu Ghraib, and their opening up of an interrogation camp in Afghansitan to reporters in 2002 as evidence that they can, if they want, allow access and scrutiny when it becomes necessary, or serves their purposes. Hiding behind “it’s all “classified” is a bogus argument.
The formal techniques we supposedly use are public knowledge. And no one suggests that we get access to the actual intelligence reports generated by the interrogations.
The Bush administration is trying to portray what’s going on as a bunch of isolated incidents perpetrated by overzealous low-level functionaries and grunts.
Or, if they go higher than that, to portray the commanders as merely negligent rather than complicit.
They are trying to nip it in the bud.
20 or 30 years from now I guarantee you that the lid will come off for the world to see and it will not be pretty.
I expect the next line of defense to be “Clinton did it too,” quite honestly. And he did allow rendition to take place. But I am fairly certain he didn’t sign or request any memos that looked for loopholes in the US anti-torture statute.
That, in and of itself, should tell you something. They KNEW what they were doing was at the very least hitting the line, if not crossing it, at the highest levels.
This came from the top down.
Sulla
Hesiod,
Whatever, if you sleep better at night thinking I
Hesiod
“When Lott made some off-hand remark about how he wished Thurmond should have been President, it was like the sky was falling. When Durbin states US troops are the equivalent of Nazis, he’s just trying to make a point badly.
Please…”
Yes…please spare us this bullshit propaganda.
We don’t even know if those who perpetrated the abuse described in the FBI memo were US military or not. They were UNIDENTIFIED.
It was REPUBLICANS who associated our military personnel with Nazis. Not Dick Durbin.
You cannot assume the abusers were US military personnel. It is very possible they were not. They may have been private contractors.
If you want to debate THE FACTS, then stop repeating bullshit GOP propaganda.
M’kay?
Hesiod
“When Lott made some off-hand remark about how he wished Thurmond should have been President, it was like the sky was falling. When Durbin states US troops are the equivalent of Nazis, he’s just trying to make a point badly.
Please…”
Yes…please spare us this bullshit propaganda.
We don’t even know if those who perpetrated the abuse described in the FBI memo were US military or not. They were UNIDENTIFIED.
It was REPUBLICANS who associated our military personnel with Nazis. Not Dick Durbin.
You cannot assume the abusers were US military personnel. It is very possible they were not. They may have been private contractors.
If you want to debate THE FACTS, then stop repeating bullshit GOP propaganda.
M’kay?
Hesiod
“Whatever, if you sleep better at night thinking I
John Cole
When Lott made some off-hand remark about how he wished Thurmond should have been President, it was like the sky was falling. When Durbin states US troops are the equivalent of Nazis, he’s just trying to make a point badly.
Lott was wrong, Durbin was not tactful.
I think I see a difference, no matter how many times you falsely claim Durbin ‘States US troops are the equivalent of Nazis.’
He stated that if you read these accounts of abuse, if you did not know who had done them, you would have thought they were done by really terrible people, and not, American soldiers.
Darrell
John H wrote: When you’re arresting people in their homes, detaining people brought in by bounty-seeking surrogates, and otherwise grabbing people in non-combat situations, the whole distinction of legal vs. illegal combatants becomes meaningless. Many of the prisoners are not and never were combatants.
echoed by ‘shep’: supposedly, most of these poor schmucks were picked up in Afghanistan fighting the Northern Alliance in a civil war. How ‘bout we repatriate the worthless ones (90%+)
90% of those being held are “worthless”? more innocent victims of Rumsfeld and BushHitler I suppose. “Many” of those held were never combatents?
I bet I’ve read this or similar comments from the left 100+ times in the past 3 or 4 weeks on Balloon Juice alone.. and at least once from the blog host claiming that there are large numbers of innocents being detained by our military. No doubt some innocents were detained and released after questioning. But I’m having a big f*cking problem with what appears to be a majority of the leftists in this country (along with a few ‘moderates’) spreading the LIE that large number of innocents are being detained and ‘tortured’.
If they had any honor, those making these claims (smears) that many/most detained in military prisons are innocent would provide evidence or STFU. But they have no such evidence and no honor, so they continue to advance an unsubstantiated f*cking lie being spread for the purpose of undermining our war efforts and to smear our military. It comes down to that. It really does
The left tells us they are only sincerely, patriotically concerned about America’s reputation and want to do the right thing. Well if that’s true, why are most leftists running around screaming that that many/most of the detainees are a bunch of innocent sheepherders caught up in the Rumsfeld net of abuse? The truth is, the left doesn’t know, but has purposefully chosen to make the smear anyway to damage US and military credibility.. kind of like comparing our treatment of military prisoners to Pol Pot and defending those comparisons as ‘valid’.
Darrell
I’m a patriot. You aren’t.
I believe in American ideals, you don’t. You’re a fascist.
LOL, behold the ‘patriotic’ left. Such intellectual depth
Darrell
Allegation:
On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water.
Interrogation Techniques:
Use of stress positions (e.g. prolonged standing)- check
But the prisoner was found on the ground, not standing. I read nothing in the FBI report (from ACLU link) about ‘prolonged’ standing or other stress positions.
Unless you have additional information which I missed, in the interest of fairness and honesty, I believe that particular “check” should be removed, no?
Hesiod
“LOL, behold the ‘patriotic’ left. Such intellectual depth.”
I’m not on the left. I’m a centrist.
I oppose affirmative action in amost all cases. I am generally in support of lower taxes and less regulations, except in times of crisis. [Like now].
I supported the war in Afghanistan. In fact, I criticized Bush for ebing too TIMID in the way he fought that war. The results being that Osama ad a lot of Taliban slipped through our fingers to cause further trouble.
I support the war against terrorism, generally.
I supported the FIRST Gulf war.
I even would have supported military action against Saddam had he posed a credible threat to the United States. [Starting with strategic bombing, however. And not a full-scale invasion unless we had no otehr options.]
I can go on. But the basic pount is that I oppose Bush because he’s incompetent, corrupt and a fascist.
Not necessarily in that order.
Hesiod
“If they had any honor, those making these claims (smears) that many/most detained in military prisons are innocent would provide evidence or STFU. But they have no such evidence and no honor, so they continue to advance an unsubstantiated f*cking lie being spread for the purpose of undermining our war efforts and to smear our military. It comes down to that.”
Excuse me, but it is incumbant upon YOU to provide evidence that they are guilty of something. Not the other way around. Guilty until presumed innocent ain’t how it works, a-hole.
Maybe they are, indeed, mid and high level Al Qaeda and Taliban. Or maybe the are primarily low-level Taliban grunts and footsoldiers who’s only “crime” was to take up arms against the invading US forces.
In the latter case, that would make them POWs, not terrorists.
In any event, until you provide some EVIDENCE that ANY of those detainees are guilty of being terrorists, you should be the one shuitting the F up.
Excuse me if I don’t believe Donald Rumsfeld’s proclamations of their guilt.
Darrell
But the basic pount is that I oppose Bush because he’s incompetent, corrupt and a fascist.
Bush the “fascist”, I see.. this, after you praised in the comments above, Nazis interrogation techniques. Would these be the same interrogation techniques used by Klaus Barbie? I can see you are a deep thinker
As for your strategic military advice in how we should have invaded Iraq, I believe we DID start with strategic bombing as best we could. But given that large numbers of Baathists troops and terrorists were concentrated in densely populated areas, the strategy you advocate (more bombing, no boots on the ground) would have with a doubt resulted in MORE civilian deaths while leaving Saddam, a certifiable mass murdering sociopath, in power.
I would say the military strategy you advocate can be fairly described as incompetent and poorly thought out.
Darrell
Excuse me, but it is incumbant upon YOU to provide evidence that they are guilty of something. Not the other way around. Guilty until presumed innocent ain’t how it works, a-hole.
Tell us Hesiod, when have illegal combatents, or POW’s for that matter, EVER been afforded civilian criminal defendent rights? Can you tell us which war that happened? Never? Oh, my look who’s really the a-hole
Captain Wrath
“He stated that if you read these accounts of abuse, if you did not know who had done them, you would have thought they were done by really terrible people, and not, American soldier.”
Okay John, so here is my point. Well, first of all lets get the quote straight:
“If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings…”
He said ‘Nazis’, did he not?
He is not comparing them to just ‘terrible people’. He is directly comparing them to the perpetrators of the very worst genocides in history. ‘Terrible’ is a rather light term in this context. Someone who likes tease homeless animals or always parks in handicapped spots is a ‘terrible person’.
Reading that description, I would not think that this was the gulags, or Auschwitz or the killing fields because that description does not describe those horrors at all. Those atrocities are of such a magnitude that what Durbin read shrinks to the subatomic. They are not in the same universe.
Therein lies the problem. It does not mean, like so many claim, that we are saying, “We are not as long as we’re not as bad as the Nazis, anything goes!”. What it means is that if we are going to have ANY sort of constructive discussion of the prisoner treatment, there needs to be proper perspective. PERSPECTIVE. Pulling the “Nazi” card in the debate was both inaccurate (to put it mildly) and it also completely knocked over the debate table wherein an all out brawl ensued.
Sorry, but if you read what the guy said, he was not engaged in criticism, but smear.
Julie O.
Unless you have additional information which I missed, in the interest of fairness and honesty, I believe that particular “check” should be removed, no?
Darrell, the e.g. means “for example.” Standing is only one example of a stress position, and laying on one side is another.
Darrell
Darrell, the e.g. means “for example.” Standing is only one example of a stress position, and laying on one side is another
Julie O, ok then, is there any evidence in the FBI report that prisoners were being forced to lay on their side for long periods of time? No? then your point would be.. ? Of course, if you don’t have a point, please feel free to make up crap as you go along if it makes you feel better
Krapotkin
It’s sad to read that so many posts are in full support of Tortures?Abuses in our own form of
Political Prisons, (to avoid comparison
with past or present foreign models).
Let’s wait and see, if in some future times,the actual Special Guards employed in such Prisons, will face Courts for violation of International Laws for Crimes Against Humanity.
delilah
I can’t believe the traitorous blathering I’m seeing from men and womenfolk who are supposedly Republicans! etc…
LearnedLimb, you are being satirical, yes?
John,
thanks for the post. I’ve been a pretty fierce moderate for years, disgusted with the way party politics turns people into blathering idiots who are so concerned with the power of the party, common decency and sense seems to fly out the window. This current administration has marginalized me (and others like me) into becoming more and more liberal, in a quest to keep those personal liberties and honor we hold so dear in this country. It is refreshing to read someone who, if not aligned with many of my ideals, can make rational arguments and advocate for simple human decency.
That being said, while I am appalled by the treatment meted to the Gitmo prisoners (especially with the assumption that most of them were likely not involved in terrorist activities, but were defending their homes and families in the face of perceived invasion), I am curious as to what people believe the alternatives for extracting information might be? The current belief of hard-line conservatives is that there are no alternatives other than forceful coercion to get information. Why hasn’t that dialogue been started?
Darrell
That being said, while I am appalled by the treatment meted to the Gitmo prisoners (especially with the assumption that most of them were likely not involved in terrorist activities, but were defending their homes and families in the face of perceived invasion)
delilah, on what possible basis do you assume “most” of those in Gitmo were likely not involved in terrorist activities but instead, according to you, acting as courageous minutemen defending their homes and family? I think it’s fair to say that patriotism, at a minimum, means giving your country the benefit of the doubt barring other information to the contrary. So when delilah and others assume, WITHOUT BASIS, that “most” or “many” of those in Gitmo are merely innocent victims or that they were noble defenders of their homeland.. well, draw your own conclusions
dealer
Durbin never said that all the troops were Nazis.
Durbin never said that if YOU read the description without knowing it came from an FBI agent YOU would think this was done by Pol Pot.
Durbin never even said that if HE read it without knowing it was from an FBI agent that Durbin would think it was a dictatorial regime.
Durbin Did Say that Most people who read the description, without knowing it came from the FBI, would associate it with a dictator.
And they would.
Darrell
Must be good exercise wailing away at those straw men dealer. Why not address what was actually said? NO ONE has claimed or suggested that Durbin said “all the troops were Nazis”.. but nice try on your part. I love it how you lefties assume no one actually read what Durbin said.. And I sympathize with Durbin’s plight. I mean, since it’s nearly impossible to criticize US interrogation techniques without comparing it to Auschwitz, Durbin’s comparison to the Nazis was perfectly understandable.. isn’t that right?
Hesiod
“Bush the “fascist”, I see.. this, after you praised in the comments above, Nazis interrogation techniques. Would these be the same interrogation techniques used by Klaus Barbie? I can see you are a deep thinker.”
No, asshole. Hans Scharff. Look him up .
Hesiod
“I am curious as to what people believe the alternatives for extracting information might be? The current belief of hard-line conservatives is that there are no alternatives other than forceful coercion to get information. Why hasn’t that dialogue been started?”
Read this book.
Prior to the start of the Iraq war, it was the bible on how to interrogate prisoners WITHOUT using torture techniques.
Also read this article by Jason Vest in the American Prospect.
dealer
Darrel when you say
”
I love it how you lefties..”
it is just shows what a sad little being you are.
I’ve been a Republican since 1979.
How long have you been a silly name caller?